The unveiling of an air-passenger bill of rights last month was a triumph for consumers, but it’s not enough.

That became uncomfortably obvious on a Qantas flight out of LAX early Monday, when 398 passengers sat on the runway for three-and-a-half hours.

The rules laid out by the Department of Transportation, which don’t take effect until later this year, would have capped that tarmac layover at three hours and carried a possible fine of $27,500 per passenger for violations. We admit that those extra 30 minutes aren’t particularly egregious when you consider, for example, the plight of Air Jamaica fliers who sat on a Maryland tarmac for eight hours last month. But the issue isn’t the time; it’s the rules themselves. Or, in this case, the lack thereof. They don’t apply to foreign carriers.

It’s not that international flights aren’t subject to any guidelines; they just only apply those operated by a U.S. carrier. Even then, the guidelines are so amorphous that there may as well not be any. Domestic airlines operating international flights cannot keep passengers on the tarmac for more than “a set number of hours as determined by the carrier.” So you’re pretty much relying on the carrier’s concerns about bad press, which is nothing new.

Maybe that doesn’t matter much since foreign carriers, such as Qantas, are so far exempt even from that ambiguous decree – for no obvious good reason. After all, foreign automobile companies like Toyota must follow U.S. requirements that new vehicles in the United States meet specific gas-mileage goals, and the European Union can fine U.S.-based Microsoft billions of dollars for blocking competition.

So, as of now, the U.S. mandates no limit on how long you can wait on the tarmac before you start your 14-hour flight from Los Angeles to Sydney, which is what those passengers were waiting for Monday morning. That’s quite a haul to look forward to after a lengthy and unscheduled tarmac wait. Compare that with a six-hour flight from Los Angeles to New York, and it becomes clear that international passengers need these rights the most.

While the announcement of the passengers bill of rights just before Dec. 25 was hailed as a “Christmas miracle” by activists, plenty of others, including the airline-industry-representing Air Transport Association, warned of agonizing consequences. Fewer flights would be offered to head off airport congestion. Carrier would cancel flights entirely instead of risking fines. Passengers headed back to the gate after three hours and one minute would miss out on clearances to take off given out after three hours and five minutes.

However, while some of the rules make more sense as jokes (a requirement to provide food after two hours on the tarmac when no such requirement exists two hours into an in-air flight?), the bill of rights is still worthwhile. Though it obviously needs some amendments.

“This is the beginning,” Secretary Ray LaHood told the Toronto Sun after the rules were announced. “We think we owe it to passengers to really look out for them.”